"without prejudice"
towards their ability to apply under new gravel mining regs

~

The Santa Fe County Commission at their
regular meeting of October 27, confirmed a denial of Buena Vista Estates / Rockology LLC's application
to mine La Bajada Mesa under a now-defunct mining regulation.
Several weeks ago, the Commission, having motioned to deny, still
allowed Applicants the opportunity to first make further written
arguments. Remaining strong in the face of lawsuits,
the Commissioners took the appropriate action unanimously. However,
the Commission has denied the BV application "without prejudice"
leaving open an ability for applicants to reapply under the new
code:

Commissioner Kathy Holian:

"[Concerning] CDRC Case # ZMXT 13-5360,
having duly considered applicant's written arguments, I move
to deny the application. Since the article under which they applied
is no longer applicable and a new Article XVII of the Land Development
Code is a valid legislative inactivant of countywide applicability,
this denial is without prejudice to the Applicant's ability to
apply for a DC Overly Zoning District and a DCI Conditional Use
Permit under Article
XVII of the Land Development Code or applicable provisions
of the Sustainable Land Development Code, once it is in effect."

The ball is in the speculator's
court as La Bajada Mesa remains in beauty thanks to our Commissioners
and the thousands of citizens who have contributed in many ways
towards its preservation over the years.

The action was taken by the Santa Fe County
Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at its Regular Meeting on
September 29, 2015. When the BCC came out of Executive Session
under Matters from the County Attorney, Commissioner
Kathy Holian read a statement noting that the application was
submitted under the old Article XI and does not meet the minimum
requirements of the new Sustainable Land Development Code (SLDC)
Article XVII that directs Developments of Countywide Impacts
(DCIs). She recommended that the application be denied "without
prejudice" so that the applicants would be free to reapply
for a DCI overlay zone under Article XVII. She then made a motion
to that effect, to deny but to allow the applicants (and other
interested persons) the opportunity to make written arguments
by October 14 as to whether their application should be
denied, and to put an item for final action on the October
27 agenda. All four commissioners present (Commissioner Chavez
was absent) voted in favor of the motion.

Here is the transcript as summarized above.

Commissioner Kathy Holian:

"In CDRC Case # ZMXT 13-5360, the application
was made under Article XI of the Land Development Code rather
than the recently enacted Article XVII of the Land Development
Code. It does not comply with the submittal requirements of Article
XVII, and did not follow the review procedures established in
Article XVII. Consequently, it seems to me the application should
be denied, without prejudice to the applicants' ability to apply
for a DCI Overlay Zoning District and DCI Conditional Use Permit
under Article XVII. In fairness to the applicants, however, they
should be given an opportunity to explain why the Board should
not deny their existing application.

"Accordingly, I move that (1) staff inform
the applicants that the Board has tentatively concluded that
their application should be denied, without prejudice to their
ability to apply under Article XVII of the Land Development Code;
(2) the applicants and other interested persons be given until
October 14, 2015, to submit written argument to the Land
Use Administrator as to whether the application should be denied,
without prejudice to the applicants' ability to apply under Article
XVII; and (3) that this case be placed on the agenda of the Board's
October 27, 2015, meeting, at which time the Board will
consider any written arguments submitted and take final action
on the referenced CDRC case."

The ball is in the speculator's
court as La Bajada Mesa remains in beauty thanks to our Commissioners
and the thousands of citizens who have contributed in many ways
towards its preservation over the years.

News Posted September 28, 2015: Santa Fe County May Take Action on
Mining Application. Third Suit Filed by Mining Speculators:

The County could be taking action this Tuesday,
September 29, at a regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners.
On the agenda, under Matters from [the] County Attorney, and
following a closed Executive Session on the speculator's application
to strip basalt from La Bajada Mesa, there is the following item:

We don't here wish to guess the action that
the Commissioners might take nor presume too much. Will they
take action under the current regulations (Article XI)? And will
they listen to the public's demands that this application be
denied?

The application to strip this NM landmark
was filed near the end of 2013. The issues along with the application
itself are attached below on this page.
The possible county action can be viewed live on the County's
home page. Look for Video on Demand. Although the
meeting begins at 2 PM, this item is near the end of the agenda.
Note that this is not a public hearing but some public presence
before our representatives would be good.

News Posted August 24, 2015: The Santa Fe County Commission, at an August 11 hearing,
approved new stronger gravel mining regulations that will apply
countywide: Article
XVII. This is being regarded as a good step forward in substantial
ways. The new Developments of Countywide Impact (DCIs) ordinance
should give the county stronger authority to rule on an application
to mine an area like La Bajada Mesa or any site that might require
blasting. It is expected that other DCI and non-DCI mining ordinances
may be reviewed by the county over the next few months for possible
alteration coincident with the enactment of the new county code
(SLDC).

Also, from Facebook you can read articles
about the hearing.

TAKEFIVE!

Thanks also to all those who wrote or spoke
out at the hearing asking for strengthening the ordinance and
for a mine size reduction in the definition of Level 1 mines.
This concern remains.

Level 1 gravel mining operations should at
most TAKE UNDER5 ACRES, NOT TEN as the new DCI regulations
now mandate.

Although the new DCIs ordinance means that
Santa Fe County now has the power to make smarter choices, these
regulations only apply to gravel mines with blasting or zones
targeting 10 acres or more, or over 20,000 tons of extraction.

At the hearing there were many requests to
extend DCI classification down to 5 acres or more. An editorial
that morning in the New Mexican supported this request. We can't
know for sure, but some believe the Commissioners could have
been persuaded to vote for a reduction in size, but for a surprise
rationale from a County subcontractor who argued to retain a
10 acre DCI cut-off instead of 5. He said that a "five hundred
foot buffer on all sides is a total of 5.7 acres of buffer so
no one could then possibly do a 5 acre mine". But as was
pointed out at the hearing, his math was clearly wrong. Furthermore,
there are no such specific instructions within the ordinance
for such internal mine zone setbacks that would reduce the actual
size of a pit to less than 5 acres. His intentions were likely
positive. Read more on this issue below in the August 10, Pre-Hearing
Posting.

For now a mine zone application of less than
10 acres will be dealt with as "small", will be exempt
from DCI classification, and will instead be subject to "lesser
standards" as county staff has expressed it. These lesser
standards will need to be strengthened to insure that such essentials,
such as successful reclamation are assured, and that the siting
criteria is also stringent.

Correcting ordinances may take more time than
some of us would like, but we're committed to getting it right
on both levels.

Stay tuned for news on this and regarding
developments on Rockology's & Buena Vista's law suits against
the County.

And meanwhile . . . come to the party!

_____________

August 10, 2015 Pre-Hearing
Posting:

There is nothing "small" about
a 10 acre zone, the number in the
draft regulations for minimal impact mines based on state criteria,
averaged from mining operations that also include large ore and
hard rock mines.

The county plan (SGMP) encourages the use
of local building materials, but with a "slump" in
construction in Santa Fe and an increase in Albuquerque, it doesn't
take a degree in economics to determine that gravel mined from
"small operations with lesser standards" in Santa Fe
County could end up being largely exported.

Tuesday, August 11, no sooner than 5 PM it's
expected Santa Fe County Commissioners are likey to decide the
siting criteria and operational guidelines of new gravel mines
countywide. Regulating gravel mines is part of new regulations
for Developments of Countywide Impacts (DCIs). Larger "Level
2" mines would be governed by the new rules (Article XVII)
with the existing rules (Article XI and later 10.19) applying
to smaller "Level 1" operations.

At the first hearing (July 28), Commissioner
Liz Stefanics broached consideration of lowering the minimal
impact category Level 1 mines to under 5 acres instead of 10.
This should be supported far and wide for several reasons:

--A state 10 acre minimal impact definition
is based on a statewide average, which would include giant mines
far from Santa Fe County as well as ore mines which are often
huge.

--It would be a better fit for the proposed
limit of 20,000 tons, and lessen the possibility of more extensive
disturbance of lands with marginally recoverable materials

--There is the concern that with a larger
10 acre zone Land Use Administrators or their assistants, or
Commissioners would be asked by mining companies for waivers
to exceed the limit in tonnage (20,000) thus sidestepping the
new regulations they would otherwise be required to use.

Short of recyclables,
we understand that gravel is neededbut we also need
strong mining regulations, and ultimately large scale mining
is hardly sustainable.

The draft regulations are pretty good, but final encouragement from a concerned citizenry
for strengthening these rules--also meant to protect the public
welfare and the environment--is dearly needed, as follows.

--County Staff has proposed (& this is
good!) that for a minimal impact new operation permit, besides
a limitation on size and tonnage, the project must also meet
the definition of Minimal Impact as found in the New Mexico Administrative
Code (19.10.1.M.(2) NMAC). But this is something we now think
must be included in the future regulations: the strengthening
of regulations governing the "small" mines. Check this
website for updates.

Summary of important items needed:

--reduce minimum impact Level 1 mines to under
5 acres
--assure that the regulations are not invalidated by other contrary
statutes in the code
--allow for unannounced site inspections
--visual impact analysis
--mitigation of negative impacts on properties beyond the properties
immediately surrounding a mine (or as the Moratorium ordinance
itself expressed it: "DCIs . . . have the potential to affect
the environment and public health, safety, and welfare beyond
the impacts on immediately neighboring properties.")--require applications to first seek non-potable water for
dust control
--require that a NM approved professional reclamation specialist
design and oversee reclamation
--specify that no more than 2 acres may be disturbed or remain
unreclaimed at any given time.

Considering that mining machinery could
be used just 1/2 mile from residents, for years, there's a need for discretion to require
crushers and loud equipment be enclosed in sound-insulated structures
and back-up beepers be mitigated through site design where possible.

Such outstanding and basic issues yet remain,
however with your encouragement through letters to the editor,
to your Commissioner, along with your attendance on Tuesday (5
PM), our democratic process will surely help to get it right:
to protect the public welfare and the environment while locating
gravel mines appropriately.

Where: The hearing will be in the in the
Santa Fe County Commission chambers, 102 Grant Ave, after 5 PM.

Please be respectful,sign your name, and give
your address. Remember, we're supportive of the county's intentions
but need these regulations to be strong enough to do what they're
meant to do--protect the public welfare and the environment.
Also, these regulations are designed to cover a variety of DCIs.
As these regulations are to apply to all gravel mines, please
do NOT directly reference La Bajada or prior mining applications.Note the above issues in your letter, but your message
will be more effective if you can personalize your message. For
maximum impact, place your commissioner first in the "To"
line.

If a final vote is postponed
on the 11th, writeletters
to the Editor of the New Mexican: Send
either letters (150 words) or My Views (600 words) to letters@sfnewmexican.com
. Must include the writer's name, address and phone number to
be considered for publication.

Some HISTORY
OF THESE ISSUES:Last Fall, after massive public outcry over a proposed gravel mine on La Bajada mesa, the
county placed a one-year moratorium on certain kinds of "developments
of county-wide impact" (DCIs), including sand & gravel
operations requiring blasting.Since then, the county has drafted new regulations
to manage future high-impact development. We sincerely appreciate
the hard work and good intentions that have gone into this effort.
But the draft regulations still fall short and all
our work to save La Bajada mesa depends on strong DCI regulations.The moratorium expires mid-September, so the hearings
are on an accelerated time line. You can read about the history
of the struggle below. Track this via FACEBOOK/Savelabajada!

--Will
the new regulations reinforce a County Commission's discretionary
authority to deny applications for mining zones on such cultural
landscapes as La Bajada mesa?

--All
hinges on the development of strong DCI regulations that will
clearly allow for a denial so that "No mining use activity
will be permitted if it is determined that the use will have
a significant adverse affect on health, safety, morals or general
welfare of the County or its residents." (Article XI, 1996
Code) For more views & current news follow Facebook.

--The
County Staff has indicated that they may hire someone to draft
the language and perhaps hire experts on what to include and
how to write the Code requirement. The RCA has expressed
interest in seeing who they are considering, and understanding
his/her background and prior project recommendations. Staff further
is contemplating that there would be a "study group"
where public input on the details will be requested.

--During
the writing of the new regulations, again citizen's input will
be essential to make sure that La Bajada mesa and "places
of the heart" in Santa Fe County, remain protected. We must
emerge with strong and unequivocal laws.

Strengthen,
don't weaken!

RECENT BACKGROUND: At the
August 12 hearing the BCC again postponed any decision on strip-mining
this NM cultural landscape, La Bajada Mesa. Before an overflowing
chamber and after having heard testimony from the public for
3 hours, the County Commission retired into a closed session
with the county attorney. When they reemerged 90 minutes later,
the result was not a long awaited vote. Instead they announced
that they are taking Rockology's & Buena Vista's mining application
"under advisement" intending to issue a "written
order" sometime in the future. Instead of such
a written order, the Commission opted to call for a moratorium
that would postpone any decision on Buena Vista & Rockology's
application to strip La Bajada Mesa of its primordial basalt
layer.

~

La Bajada Mesa is the stunning
tabletop, 15 miles south of Santa Fe on I-25. Mining here would
destroy this historic, iconic landscape and the sustainable economies
that depend on it.

"Significance:
La Bajada represents a key landscape demarcation between what
the Spanish colonial world termed the Rio Abajo and Rio Arriba
regions of New Mexico--the lower and upper lands with their distinct
ecologies and climates. It also represented the greatest single
obstacle for movement across the land...." --NMHPA, 2003.

Reducing [La Bajada Mesa]
to crushed basalt for road base would be a travesty in its own
right. Overdrawing the regional water budget - which is already
over-committed - for such a destructive purpose would be a double
travesty. --RCA Protest witness, Kim Sorvig, Professor, UNM
School of Architecture and Planning

More Information:
La Bajada Mesa and Escarpment named by the NMHPA as one of New
Mexico's "Most
Endangered Places" (pdf)

Background:An application (pdf, satellite pdf,
site sheets pdf)
to mine a 50 acre section of La Bajada Mesa was submitted to
Santa Fe County near the end of 2013. La Bajada Mesa is
a historic landmark that the New
Mexico Heritage Preservation Alliance (NMHPA) has recognized
as one of New Mexico's "Most Endangered Places".

The application aims to strip the
basalt cap--according to their figures--to a depth of 61 feet, and crush it for gravel for a proposed 25 year
period using blasting, multiple
crushers, hauling trucks. ["Concerning years of operations"
along with location maps of past mining proposals, click here.] This application
comes under the jurisdiction of the 1996 Land Development Code,
Article XI, not the new Sustainable Land Development Code.

The County Development Review Committee
(CDRC) voted (3/20/14) to deny Rockology & Buena Vista's
application. The case automatically
is forwarded to the 5-member Board of County Commissioners (BCC)
who are expected to vote for or against the mining of the Mesa.

The water source for
dust suppression has been modified.
Rather than the County supplying hauled potable water, Rockology
has obtained an additional permit for effluent water from City
facilities on 599. The route would be 599 to I-25 to Waldo Canyon
Road. Both the County and City possess water policy shortsightedness.

Has the City, like the County before it,
unwittingly committed to years of providing water for the destruction
of La Bajada Mesa? They have apparently done soin times
of pending drought when water shortages could demand that scarce
water resources might be needed more directly for the public
welfare rather than for such industrial development.

The new County Code would classify such
a mine as a Development of Countywide Impact . Using water, City
or County, to enable the degradation of this historic NM cultural
landscape would not benefit the public welfare.

Meanwhile, to our knowledge, Buena Vista
has not withdrawn their water rights transfer application for
mining on over 5,000 acres from the Office of the State Engineer
(OSE) that the RCA and others are protesting. For information
on the water protest see the September 2013 update.

The proposed mine site is identical as diagramed in their 2008 application as shown
here along with other past siting
proposals. The 2008 application, along with theirs of 2005, had
been withdrawn because of uncertain water sources and perhaps
because County Staff was then recommending (as reported in the
New Mexican March 25, '08) "denial of the permit based
on a 'cadre' of issues . . . ." These included impacts upon
historical and archeological resources.

There are shortcomings in the application
that have also been noticed by county staff, but the staff
Case Manager is recommending approval of the permit. The County
Development Review Committee wisely did NOT follow staff's recommendations
in this case, but it's the County Commission that will
make the decision.

A final rejection of a permit will happen
only through citizen's continued and unequivocal input and attendance
of the hearing to reject the travesty of reducing La Bajada Mesa
to base course. Santa Fe County has an excess of such aggregate
already.

The amount of water needed is not clear.
(The application claims a total of 710,000 gallons a year or
2.19 acre feet, which we think would be woefully insufficient
to accomplish the suppression of dust.)

The submittal does not address water
for reclamation. A letter from
the Office of the State Engineer notes that since certain documents
were not provided, a technical analysis was not performed.
And the OSE appears to toss the issue back to the discretion
of the county.

It is most important to attend the Board
of County Commission (BCC) hearing on this to show your opposition. The great public showing of concerned citizens
mattered in the just decision of the CDRC to deny Buena Vista
and such a showing will again matter dearly before the BCC on
Wednesday June 11 at the Santa Fe Convention Center.

We must keep sending letters to the Case Manager and county officials so that
with your help we can once-and-for-all press the county to deny
the siting of such an irreversible, ruinous use of this vital,
historic New Mexico cultural landscape. The state, the
county, the city of Santa Fe and citizens all need to work together
to find a way to preserve La Bajada Mesa & Escarpment, which
is worthy of being part of a National Monument.

Spread the word to individuals and organizations,
gear up and write letters to the county and newspapers, and resolved
to help save the Mesa from a speculative travesty.

Send an EMAIL to All of the County Commissioners

ACTION RATIONALE: Hearing from the public definitely
made a difference with the County Development Review Committee
(CDRC) and is making an impact on the Board of County Commissioners
(BCC).

Write to your County Commissioners (best in your own
words) thanking them in supporting
the moratorium on Developments
of Countywide Impact and for their encouragements that proceedings
be held before the public. (Treat
them with respect.)

INSTRUCTIONS:1) Put in SUBJECT: Re: Thanks for supporting a moratorium on DCIs
and gravel mining

PRESERVATION--La Bajada Mesa, listed by the
New Mexico Heritage Preservation Alliance as a Most Endangered
Place, is the gateway to the city of Santa Fe and needs to be
a protected cultural landscape. The arts, including paintings,
drawings, pottery, photographs and films attest to the profound
significance of La Bajada Mesa to New Mexico's culture and economy.

--The current owners have no protected
rights to demand a rezoning as they purchased the property with
the current agricultural/residential zoning in place. The County
has no obligation to enhance the value of the property (which
is also for sale) to the detriment of the County and State as
a whole.

IMPACTS--Mining the Mesa would ruin the
geological integrity--the grandeur of this oceanic Gateway along
I-25 into Santa Fe & Waldo Canyon Road, the road leads into
the Galisteo basin park lands, a sustainable and growing economic
resource.

--Mining in this site would result in environmental
and cultural degradation of a landscape that has been historically,
culturally and environmentally significant to New Mexico for
hundreds of years.

--Development of such an industry poorly
sited on an otherwise open landscape would result in impacts
including increased pollution from carbon emissions and fugitive
dust from multiple crushers, conveyors and heavy industrial traffic,
along with blasting and night lighting.

--Mining in this location would not only
negatively impact the Gateway vista from I-25 and Waldo Canyon
Road--the western access to the Cerrillos Hills State Park--but
would be a blight from the higher elevations of the trails that
lead from the Cerrillos Hills State Park on BLM lands up Grand
Central Mt. and from other recognized scenic vistas from the
south and east.

--The New Mexico State Parks, through the
"Cerrillos Hills/Galisteo Basin State Park Feasibility Study"
in 2006 concluded that the best access to the future state park
would be from the I-25 corridor. An intensive expanding mine
in this location along Waldo Canyon Road would have a discouraging
impact upon a significant number of park visitors encountering
unanticipated industrial activities, including the trucks on
the road and the visual impacts of the mine itself.

--There is no need for another basalt gravel
mine in the County or another gravel mining operation off of
I-25 as there are several existing gravel mines within reasonable
proximity that can provide these materials to Rockology itself,
an Albuquerque based company.

--Reclamation would be next to impossible
after stripping some 20 feet of basalt. There is little surface
topsoil to set aside for reclamation. There are no strong standards
to insure that reclamation would be a success and there is the
likelihood that what would be left behind would be an endless
source of dust.

WATER--Hauled water should not be considered
adequate for long term mining operations. Santa Fe County should
develop a policy that does not by default provide water to all
Developments of Countywide Impact including oil and gas, mining,
CAFO's etc. and not allow them to evade needed acquisition of
commercial / industrial water rights. When a proposed mine is
sited well (which the Buena Vista / Rockology isn't) it should
have its own long-term water supply on site so as to eliminate
the impacts of water hauling that includes traffic hazards as
well as additional carbonization and infrastructure impacts from
heavy trucks.

--Precedence? With a precedent was set
for mining any portion of the Mesa, and then a mining company
were to buy any or all of the remaining thousands of acres that
are for sale on the international market, with such a precedence,
what would become the county's ability to halt further mining
applications from new corporate owners?

--Because hauling water for needed dust
control is expensive, and because the company may be underestimating
the amount needed, it may be they simply will not keep the dust
contained, and especially if state air quality enforcement resources
prove inadequate in providing oversight.

--Can Buena Vista / Rockology be trusted
to spend money on sufficient dust control? Contrary to Rockology's
application of 2008 which claimed that the mined materials were
needed for the Railrunner construction project, it was revealed
by the press that NMDOT already had secured all the materials
they would need. Their true intention appeared to be to start
a 50 acre operation until at least 2020. Why should we trust
them now in 2014 to go to the extra expense needed to haul sufficient
water for dust control?

--The acre feet of water suggested by Buena
Vista (2.19) is woefully insufficient to accomplish the intended
uses, which in their application does not include reclamation.

--The amount of water needed is not clear.
The application claims a total of 710,000 gallons a year or 2.19
acre feet, which we think would be woefully insufficient to accomplish
the suppression of dust. Even this amount would generate thousands
of heavy water haul truck passes a year and contribute to deterioration
of our roads, the repair of which the taxpayer would have to
subsidize.

--In keeping with the county strategy to
allow growth only where it is wanted and timely, this is also
not a good location.

--It is not in the public welfare to use
valuable water to open up an unsustainable relatively short-term
operation that would permanently degrade a long recognized historic
and cultural landscape--a landscape that can otherwise contribute
sustainably to the county's economic welfare through the tourist
industry.

SPECULATION--The current owners have no protected
rights to demand a rezoning for the extractive industry as they
purchased the property with the current agricultural/residential
zoning in place. The County has no obligation to enhance the
value of the property by shifting its economic worth from the
value of an acre to the cubic yard.

--The property is for sale on the international
market. Buena Vista Estates (Directors: Peter Naumburg, Jerry
Geist, Hugh Jack Graham) is marketing the entire property
of approximately 5217 acres and is including in the purpose the mining
of basalt and other minerals. Rockology Limited, LLC (Officer:
Steve Hooper) would operate the mine.

--The applicant is seeking to rezone a
portion of La Bajada Mesa from agriculture/residential to mining
for its narrowly focused economic interests. Any such mining
zone would likely be subject to expansion. The whole mesa is
capped by basalt. Example: in 2002 JR Hale Contracting proposed
a 500 acre strip-mine there that overlaps the current 50 acres
as diagramed.

--County staff in the past (2005 &
2008) recommend denial of the permit based on a "cadre"
of reasons including the threat to historical and archeological
resources and because they did not want to create a new mining
zone. Has anything changed since 2008 that would make gravel
mining in this location any more or less suitable? Less, YES!
Since then, a State Park has become a reality offering a sustainable
resource just east and down wind from the proposed mine site
which is incompatible.

Posted for the public
by the Rural Conservation Alliance, an alliance of community organizations
and individuals
dedicated to the preservation and protection of the natural resources
and rural character
of the Galisteo Basin area of Santa Fe County, New Mexico.